Abstracts
Abstract
European companies are increasingly putting “diversity statements” on corporate websites. Websites are important because they are used by members of the public, especially the younger generation, to seek information about companies. Legitimacy theory is often cited as one explanation for having good diversity policies, but we found no research in the diversity, HRM or social accounting literature with empirical evidence of different types of legitimacy associated with diversity. We examined on-line diversity statements from 174 top European companies for evidence of legitimacy-enhancing messages, and coded them by type of legitimacy. We show that diversity statements are presented in ways associated with two different types of legitimacy (pragmatic exchange and moral). International differences are also highlighted. These findings will help practitioners to design diversity statements based on a better understanding that legitimacy is a multi-faceted construct, and help them avoid the dangers of empty discourse, i.e. inconsistency between words and reality.
Keywords:
- legitimacy,
- diversity management,
- social disclosure,
- websites,
- Europe
Résumé
À travers leurs sites Internet, les grands groupes tendent à multiplier les discours sur la diversité. Les sites Internet sont devenus des outils de communication importants tant ils sont utilisés par le grand public, ou appréciés par la jeune génération pour la recherche d’informations. La théorie de la légitimité est souvent citée pour expliquer le fait d’avoir une bonne politique en matière de diversité. Cependant, aucune recherche ne stipule de quels types de légitimité il s’agit. Notre analyse de 174 sites Internet des grands groupes à travers l’Europe souligne deux types de légitimités (pragmatique et morale) fréquemment associées à ces messages sur la diversité. Des différences entre pays sont mises en exergue. Des préconisations sont également formulées pour mieux appréhender la légitimité comme une notion multi-faces et éviter de construire des messages vides de sens, inconsistants vis-à-vis de la réalité.
Mots clés:
- légitimité,
- management de la diversité,
- discours,
- Internet,
- Europe
Resumen
A través de los sitios de Internet, las empresas europeas tienden a multiplicar los discursos sobre la diversidad. Los sitios de Internet se han convertido en importantes herramientas de comunicación tanto para el público en general como para las nuevas generaciones que realizan sus búsquedas de información en estos. La teoría de la legitimidad es citada frecuentemente para explicar la existencia de políticas en materia de diversidad. Sin embargo, ninguna investigación estipula de qué tipos de legitimidad se trata. Nuestro análisis de 174 páginas Web de grandes empresas europeas subraya dos tipos de legitimidad (pragmática y moral) frecuentemente asociada a estos mensajes sobre la diversidad. Se enfatizan las diferencias entre países. Estos descubrimientos ayudarán a los profesionales a diseñar fórmulas para comprender mejor la legitimidad como noción multifacética y evitar la construcción de mensajes carecientes de sentido y la inconsistencia entre las palabras y la realidad.
Palabras claves:
- legitimidad,
- gestión de la diversidad,
- discurso,
- Internet,
- Europa
Appendices
Bibliography
- Adams, Carol A.; Coutts Andrew; Harte George (1995). “Corporate equal opportunities (non-)disclosure”, British Accounting Review, vol. 27, p. 87-108.
- Adams, Carol A.; Hill, Wan-Ying.; Roberts Clare B. (1998). “Corporate social reporting practices in Western Europe: Legitimating corporate behaviour?”, British Accounting Review, vol. 30, n°1, p. 1-21.
- Ashforth, Blake E.; Gibbs, Barrie W. (1990). “The double-edge of organizational legitimation”, Organization Science, vol. 1, n° 2, p. 177-194.
- Benschop, Yvonne (2001). “Pride, prejudice and performance: Relations between HRM, diversity and performance”, International Journal of Human Resource Management, vol. 12, n° 7, p. 1166-1181.
- Blommaert, Jan; Verschueren, Jef (1998). Debating Diversity: Analysing the Discourse of Tolerance. New York: Routledge, 233 p.
- Campbell, David; Craven, Barrie; Shrives Philip (2003). “Voluntary social reporting in three FTSE sectors: A comment on perception and legitimacy”, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, vol. 16, n° 4, p. 558-581.
- Clarke, Julia; Gibson-Sweet, Monica (1999). “The use of corporate social disclosures in the management of reputation and legitimacy: A cross sectoral analysis of UK Top 100 companies”, Business Ethics: A European Review, vol. 8, n° 1, p. 5-13.
- Cox, Taylor H.; Blake, Stacy (1991). “Managing cultural diversity: Implications for organizational effectiveness”, Academy of Management Executive, vol. 5, n° 3, p. 45-56.
- Dart, Raymond (2004). “The legitimacy of social enterprise”, Nonprofit Management & Leadership, vol. 14, n° 4, p. 411-424.
- Dass, Parshotam A.; Parker, Barbara (1999). “Strategies for managing human resource diversity: From resistance to learning”, Academy of Management Executive, vol. 13, n° 2, p. 68-80.
- De los Reyes, Paulina (2000). “Diversity at work: Paradoxes, possibilities and problems in the Swedish discourse on diversity”, Economic and Industrial Democracy, vol. 21, n° 2, p. 253-260.
- Dowling, Grahame (2004). “Corporate reputations: should you compete on yours?”, California Management Review, vol. 46, n° 3, p. 19-36.
- European Commission (2004) Women and Men in Decision-Making Database, Luxembourg: European Commission.
- European Commission (2006). Putting equality into practice: Community Action Programme to Combat Discrimination. Luxembourg: European Commission.
- Global Reporting Initiative (2002). Sustainability Reporting Guidelines. Boston: Global Reporting Initiative.
- Hardy, Cynthia; Palmer, Ian; Phillips, Nelson (2000). “Discourse as a strategic resource”, Human Relations, vol. 53, n° 9, p. 1227-1248.
- Hofstede, Geert (1980) Culture’s consequences: international differences in work related values, New-York: Wiley.
- Hon, Linda C.; Brunner, Brigitta (2000). “Diversity issues and public relations”, Journal of Public Relations Research, vol. 12, n° 4, p. 309-340.
- Hooghiemstra, Reggy (2000). “Corporate communication and impression management - New perspectives why companies engage in corporate social reporting”, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 27, p. 55-68.
- Jayne, Michele E. A.; Dipboye, Robert L. (2004). “Leveraging diversity to improve business performance: Research findings and recommendations for organizations”, Human Resource Management, vol. 43, n° 4, p. 409-424.
- Kandola, Rajvinder; Fullerton, Johanna (1998). Diversity in Action: Managing the Mosaic (2nd ed.) London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.
- Lees, Stan (1997). “HRM and the legitimacy market”, International Journal of Human Resource Management, vol. 8, n° 3, p. 226-242.
- Liff, Sonia (1999). “Diversity and equal opportunities: Room for a constructive compromise?” Human Resource Management Journal, vol. 9, n° 1, p. 65-75.
- Lindblom, C.K. (1994). “The implications of organizational legitimacy for corporate social performance and disclosure”, Critical Perspectives on Accounting Conference, New York.
- Long, Brad S.; Driscoll, Cathy (2008). “Codes of ethics and the pursuit of organizational legitimacy: Theoretical and empirical contributions”, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 77, p. 173-189.
- Lorbiecki, Anna; Jack, G. (2000). “Critical turns in the evolution of diversity management”, British Journal of Management, vol. 11, p. S17-S31.
- Neu D.; Warsame, H.; Pedwell, K. (1998). “Managing public impressions: Environmental disclosures in annual reports”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, vol. 23, n° 3, p. 265-282.
- Palazzo, Guido; Scherer, Andreas G. (2006). “Corporate legitimacy as deliberation: A communicative framework”, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 66, p. 71-88.
- Pfeffer Jeffrey (1981). “Management as symbolic action: The creation and maintenance of organizational paradigms”, in L.L. Cummings and B. Staw (Eds.) Research in Organizational Behavior: An Annual Series of Analytical Essays and Critical Reviews. p. 1-52. Greenwich: JAI Press, 354 p.
- Powell, Walter W.; DiMaggio, Paul J. (Eds.). 1991. The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 486 p.
- Schlenker, Barry R. (1980). Impression Management: The Self-Concept, Social Identity and Interpersonal Relations. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole, 344 p.
- Suchman, Mark C. (1995). “Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches”, Academy of Management Review, vol. 20, n° 3, p. 571-610.
- Winter, Susan J.; Saunders, Carol; Hart, Paul (2003). “Electronic window dressing: Impression management with websites”, European Journal of Information Systems, vol. 12, p. 309-322.